WTF ... IS WTF!?
We are a collective of people who believe in freedom of speech, the rights of individuals, and free pancakes! We share our lives, struggles, frustrations, successes, joys, and prescribe to our own special brand of humor and insanity. If you are looking for a great place to hang out, make new friends, find new nemeses, and just be yourself, WTF.com is your new home.

Headlines HIV recovery possible?

void

Banned - What an Asshat!
4,126
0
0
#1
British man 'recovered from HIV'



Doctors are planning further tests on a British man reported to have become the first person to be cured of HIV.


Two Sunday newspapers report that Andrew Stimpson, 25 and from London, was diagnosed as HIV-positive in 2002 but found to be clear in October 2003.
Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust, which carried out the tests, has asked him to undergo more. Mr Stimpson did not take any medication for HIV. HIV experts say his case could help to reveal more about the disease.

There have been anecdotal accounts before from Africa of people shaking off the HIV virus, but the evidence in this case, as reported in the News of the World and the Mail on Sunday, appears to be conclusive, BBC health correspondent Adam Brimelow said.
Mr Stimpson told BBC News: "There are 34.9 million people with HIV globally and I am just one person who managed to control it, to survive from it and to get rid of it from my body. "For me that is unbelievable - it is a miracle. I think I'm one of the luckiest people alive."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4432564.stm
 

Boycott

Soul Doubt
1,387
1
0
#2
Wow... So this brings up a few points...
Note : the word cure is used loosely.

1. HIV is curable... Or at least untracable in certain people after a certain amount of time.
2. Did the doctors make a mistake in diagnosing him with HIV in the first place?
3. If he was actually "cured" of HIV, will they find a gene in him, or something inside of him that will start a production of vaccines after scientists learn to synth it...

Kind of funny - People in Africa have been reporting being cured of HIV... But it isn't until a British man is cured of it that it is all big in the headlines
 

void

Banned - What an Asshat!
4,126
0
0
#3
Boycott said:
2. Did the doctors make a mistake in diagnosing him with HIV in the first place?
i don't think so.. after reading this part.


Further tests
Some 14 months later he was offered another test by doctors, which came back negative. He sought compensation but has apparently been told there is no case to answer because there was no fault with the testing procedure.
 

Boycott

Soul Doubt
1,387
1
0
#4
So this guy just miraculously is cured of HIV - Without meds or anything...

I don't know if I believe that there was no fault in the first test...
 

void

Banned - What an Asshat!
4,126
0
0
#5
Boycott said:
So this guy just miraculously is cured of HIV - Without meds or anything...

I don't know if I believe that there was no fault in the first test...

i agree, it's still interesting where this goes.. if they do research on him and it helps or not.
i had the same scenario with hep c, i was diagnosed positive then 6 months later before i start the treatment i got two negatives.. it was like lifting a huge weight off me as the treatment is weekly shots in the stomach, plus the chance of liver failure.. i didn't even go there regarding sueing them for negligence, i assume i had it and it 'went'..
i think results can get mixed in the lab, i know if i worked there they would.. ;)
 

Boycott

Soul Doubt
1,387
1
0
#6
I doubt he'd be 100% clean of HIV though, if he fought it off himself... HIV is just a virus (barely)... So either his cells are VERY selective to what goes in and out of them, or something is wrong with the testing...
 

Darklight

Oppressing your posts...
5,438
87
142
#7
there was a child born like 12 years back whos mother was HIV positive and the child was not. wonder what ever came of that...
 

Noalear

uberNemesis
30
0
66
#8
The tests came back negative....

Maybe it mutated to "run silent", or it just went into remission. Evolution does some pretty spectacular things.
 

Icarus

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
6,775
251
118
#9
Darklight said:
there was a child born like 12 years back whos mother was HIV positive and the child was not. wonder what ever came of that...
That is a fairly common occurance, espescially if the mother is on HIV-repressing drugs like AZT.
 
#10
HIV Recovery Possible

I don't know what to think. Maybe the doctors did diagnose him correctly, and the virus is in some form of recession, or a pause. It wil be quite the slap in the face, if it comes back and he dies.:confused:
 

void

Banned - What an Asshat!
4,126
0
0
#11
There have been reports that a British man with HIV has apparently become clear of the virus.
BBC News website looks at the issue.

Q: What is HIV?


HIV stands for Human Immunodeficiency Virus.
HIV infects and gradually destroys the infected person's immune system, reducing their protection against infection and cancers.
The main cell HIV infects is called a T helper lymphocyte. This cell is a crucial part of the immune system, and co-ordinates the actions of other immune system cells.
A big reduction in the number of T helper cells seriously weakens the immune system.
Aids, or Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, is a term that describes the point when a person's immune system can no longer cope because of the damage caused by HIV and they start to get one or more specific illnesses.

Does a negative test mean that HIV isn't present?
No.
There are different tests to check whether someone is likely to be infected with HIV.
One is an antibody test, which checks whether the body has mounted an immune response against the virus.
A positive antibody test usually means that the person is infected with HIV.
Occasionally, however, a person can have a positive antibody test without being infected with HIV - a 'false positive' test.
The reverse is also possible - a negative test result even though the individual has the virus. This is particularly common if the person has only just caught the infection. It may be too early to detect it.
Another type of test, which detects the presence of HIV particles in the blood, can be done.
Dr Deenan Pillay, a virologist at University College London and the Health Protection Agency, said: "No test is perfect. And individual people are different and behave differently to HIV."

Q: Might the body rid itself of HIV?
The body has many defence mechanisms against viruses. However, in the case of HIV, it has not yet been proven that the body can clear itself completely of the virus.
In some patients, HIV never turns into full-blown Aids, which scientists hope will give them clues to how to beat the virus.
There have been a number of anecdotal reports of people who appear to be immune to or have shaken off HIV. But the science is sketchy.
Deborah Jack, chief executive of the National Aids Trust, said: "The virus is extremely complex and there are many unknowns about how it operates and how people's bodies react to it."
Michael Carter of the National Aids Manual added that is was also possible to be exposed to HIV but not to become infected with the virus.

Q: What do we know about HIV and why it is so hard to treat?
Viruses are unable to reproduce or replicate by themselves. Instead they need to find and infect a cell that will act as a host in which new viruses can be made.
Researchers know that once HIV has entered a human cell, it uses an enzyme called reverse transcriptase to begin the process of replication.
The enzyme is used to make a DNA copy of the virus' genetic material, RNA, which acts as the blueprint for producing components of new viruses.
Scientists have been looking at ways to interrupt this replication and there is some evidence to suggest that some individuals are appear to be better at fighting off the virus than others.
Dr George Kinghorn, an HIV specialist at Sheffield's Royal Hallamshire Hospital, said a recent French study indicated that some people who are infected with HIV are able to keep the virus under control without any antiviral treatment.
Scientists believe there are a number of possible explanations for this.
It might be that the infections were with naturally occurring strains that are less harmful than other strains of HIV.
Alternatively, these individuals may be genetically programmed to be particularly good at fighting off the virus and have more efficient immune responses than others.
However, in these cases the virus is still present in the body.
And while powerful anti-HIV drugs exist, the virus can lie dormant in the body and escape their attack.
Dr Kinghorn said: "For an individual to have been infected with a virus, cleared of it and then become antibody negative is highly unusual."

What does the latest report about Mr Andrew Stimpson - the British man who appears to have fought off HIV - add to our understanding?
Mr Stimpson, 25, was diagnosed HIV-positive in 2002 after having an HIV test, but a further test in October 2003 was found to be negative.
Doctors say it is now important that Mr Stimpson undergoes further tests so they can learn more about his case.
It is not clear whether his body has truly cleared the virus or if there is another explanation for the findings.
Scientists hope that further investigation might point a way to develop new HIV treatments. However, Dr Pillay cautioned that it was far too early to think that cases such as this would hold an immediate answer to beating HIV.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4434806.stm
 
#12
It isn't even confirmed yet that he was cured from HIV. There are so many explenations for why there are no anti-bodys (wich test use to look for HIV) in his system. The virus could be dorment in his cells (common for viruses, not documented on HIV tough). He never had HIV, faulty tests do happen. He attracted a mutated HIV-virus, wich would have had a defect and was not capable of attacking white bloodcells.

Even if his body somehow managed to destroy the virus within, then it would still be hard, maybe even impossible, to get a cure out of it. For all we know, it was something he ate. Or came in contact with, the possiblities are endless.

About the child situation: EVERY child of a woman that got HIV before/during/after "creation" does not have HIV. The children can only get it when thay are born naturaly. There eyes will come in contact with vaginal slime and then the child will have HIV. If they are brought upon this world trough a ceserean section, the child can have no HIV. Why is this? Because mother and child don't exchange blood, only food/oxygen/waste.
 

tw33k

Theoretical Realist
146
0
0
#13
As far as I've understood from what I've read in the past, there is no direct test for HIV. They look for antibodies associated with the disease, as AgentOrange said. I have read that AIDS is so deadly because it mutates continuosly, as the body fights off one form, it changes to another, then another, until the immune system is so weak it can no longer produce new antibodies for the current strain and it takes over. Not all people with HIV get AIDS obviously, with Earvin "Magic" Johnson a being a famous case. So maybe this man's HIV has mutated to a strain indetectable by current tests.
 
15
0
0
#14
hmm and then you have to assume that a buncha scientist who spent YEARS in college and formed thier lives around such things hadent thought of all this already ^^^

the media will tell you what you want to hear.. wait untill they have a cure.. until then this story means NOTHING. If anything it gives false hope to millions and puts alot of unwanted publicity on a very very lucky man.
 
507
7
82
#15
That's one lucky guy is he is actually cured. At least it's cometing to look at right --- a lead of some sort... *shrugs*

If anything it gives false hope to millions and puts alot of unwanted publicity on a very very lucky man.
How do you know it's unwanted...
 

Bitch

Evil Fluffy says: I PEE IN YOUR SHOES!
Premium
2,755
934
357
#16
Darklight said:
there was a child born like 12 years back whos mother was HIV positive and the child was not. wonder what ever came of that...
There is now a procedure when an HIV+ mother gives birth that keeps the baby from contracting the HIV virus. Apparently the fetus does not contract the infected blood from the mother while still inside. It happens during birth. So, by giving birth carefully with some certain thing the doctors do, they are able to keep the baby from getting HIV/AIDS.

Miracles or science ;)